Methinks the “misdemeanors” bit was intended to cover “anything else of gratuitous & intolerable malice or maladministration”, such as being inaugurated and then immediately moving to Fiji and refusing all communications (he’d still be President and not broken any laws, committed treason, nor solicited bribes) - there has to be a mechanism to remove a President for whatever a majority in the House agree is sufficient reason to consider and a supermajority in the Senate agrees warrants removal. “Please Mr Foreign Leader, investigate possible corruption into someone seeking my Office” isn’t it.
Agreed. Misdemeanors probably does cover it. But Rudy’s a lawyer and I’m not.
Also the Obstruction of Congress is not a legitimate charge, but Contempt of Congress is. At least one source is linking the two. But I don’t think a Contempt of Congress charge would stick, since Executive Privilege is a thing and the house-rats didn’t pursue the matter in court.